These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Component Rotation in Well-Functioning, Gap Balanced Total Knee Arthroplasty Without Navigation.
    Author: Elkins JM, Jennings JM, Johnson RM, Brady AC, Parisi TJ, Dennis DA.
    Journal: J Arthroplasty; 2023 Jun; 38(6S):S204-S208. PubMed ID: 36963529.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Malalignment of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) components is a potential cause of clinical failure following TKA. Since the goal of a gap balancing (GB) technique is equal flexion and extension gaps secondary to soft-tissue balancing, and not necessarily component alignment, variation in component placement may exist. Our purpose was (1) to evaluate precision of component alignment in well-functioning GB TKAs performed without the aid of navigation using computed tomographic evaluation and (2) to determine any relationship between femoral version and/or tibial torsion and TKA component positioning. METHODS: There were 93 well-functioning TKAs performed with an extension gap first GB technique with a minimum 2-year follow-up evaluated using computed tomography to assess component rotational alignment, as well as osseous femoral version and tibial torsion. Femoral and tibial rotational alignment was assessed by previously described methods. RESULTS: The mean Knee Society Score was 185.7 ± 21.7. The mean range of motion was 128.5 ± 7.8°. Femoral posterocondylar axis (relative to the transepicondylar axis) values ranged from -8.3 to 4.1° with a mean of -0.78 ± 2.7° (internal rotation). Mean tibial rotation was 17.2 ± 7.9° internal rotation relative to the tibial tubercle. No correlation was found between native femoral version and femoral component rotational alignment (Pearson's correlation coefficient, r, 0.007). Weak correlation was found between native tibial torsion and tibial component alignment (r = 0.24). CONCLUSION: Despite being only a secondary objective with the GB technique, most components evaluated were within the desired range of rotation. Alignment was not influenced by native osseous rotational geometry. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Retrospective Cohort Study.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]